>> and later, wall street financial reporter damian paleta talks about the cost of the disability payments program. "washington journal" is next. >> good morning. congress is on recess this week but later today, several chairman will be giving their speeches. financial markets conference in georgia. the first family is going to be hosting the han you'll white house easter egg roll and expected 35,000 parents and children will attend the 134th installment of the event that kicks off at about 10:30 this

morning. we will be discussing america's role in a changing international community. opinion pieces in the "new york times" and "wall street journal" offers different takes on what sort of leadership role the united states should take in the upcoming year. but we want to know what you think. give us a call -- host: you can also send us an e-mail and we're also on twitter . and you could find us on facebook. and a very good morning to you today. we're discussing america's place in the world. give us a call. let us know what you think but

we'll start with an opinion piece by charles cup nick from the "new york times." the piece entitled "america's place in the new world. ". and it starts off it's election season again and the main contenders for oval office are knocking themselves out to reassure americans that their nation remains at the pinnacle of the global pecking order. they're missing the point though. the most potent challenge comes from a change. the democratic secular and free market model that has become synonymous is being challenged by state capitalism and china, russia, and the persian gulf. political islam is rising and in step with the democracy and left wing populism is taking hold in india and brazil. rather than following the west path of development and accepting their place in the liberal international order,

rising nations are fascinating their own models. charles cupchin goes on to write -- host: american leaders do their country no service when they trumpet a new american century or topple governments in the name of spreading western values. doing so will drive away the very nation the united states needs on its side to confront dangerous pariahs. standing by its own values while also recognizing that there are alternative forms of responsible and response tiff governance

would elevate the moral authority, make it more likely that other countries would be as respectful of america's preferences as america should be of theirs. that's the "new york times" this morning. and we'll be discussing what you think america's place is in this changing world order. and let's get right to it. john is on the democratic line from atlanta, georgia, this morning. caller: i as a nation, i don't mind being the best but i think we should be more of an example to be a free world as to what democracy is. i don't think we should go around thinking we have something to prove. we have been, you know, basically at the top of the heap ever since world war ii when we

became and we have declared ourselves as a world power. but i think we should as i've said, be more of an example of democracy rather than to try to bully everybody. and you know, that's just my opinion, but, you know, that's how i feel. host: john from atlanta, georgia, today. a separate opinion piece. this is from today's "wall street journal." the myth of america's decline is the title of this opinion piece by walter media. want to read you a little bit of that. we're talking about the changing of world balance. it is in fact changing. the international chattering class has a label for these changes. america's decline. the financial crisis say the pundits demonstrate the failure of anglo-saxon capitalism. the war have sapped american strengths and destroyed america's ability to act in the middle east. state capital imis all the rage.

actually, what's been happening is just as stateful but much more complex. the united states is in the midst of a major rebalancing the alliances and coalition america built during the cold war no longer suffice. this is walter media today in the "wall street journal." he said in the emerging world order, the u.s. is likely to have more success in advancing its goebel agenda than many states. washington is hardly unique in wanting a world system of forcible rules of contract and protection of foreign investment --

the title of that piece is "the myth of america's decline." so we want to know. what is america's place in the world? is it in decline? is it in a new marketplace of ideas as the "new york times" said today? give us a call. we'll go right to michael on the independent line from new york city, new york. good morning, michael. caller: oh, good morning to you. happy holidays. host: happy holidays. guest: i reach -- caller: i teach in the graduate school of business and we have cities from all over the countries and i've been to china and russia and i'm thinking it's very funny, the impact of american movies and culture is being copied worldwide, you know, both in china and russia. certainly having meeting with the top leaders of russia, you have to see that they've mounted

all of their warships. the tanks in eastern europe, and they're growing at 5% per year and those new quotes is very interesting. he wants to join e.u. and nato. and he views his country as canada to e.u. and if you think about it growing up over the last 20 years, if you could manage that -- imagine that russia would be growing at 5% per year in a capital society where their children don't want to join the military but want internet cafes and now pew on is talking about him becoming canada and supplying oil to the rest of europe and -- host: so michael, what is the united states' role in this

discussion and and what's going to happen with europe and russia? caller: well, russia has decided to be canada to e.u. so we've lost an enemy and china , on a visit to china, you see the culture. they're wearing michael jordan sweatshirts and watch the disney channel so the effect on american culture on both russia and china is outstanding. i see it with my students in the graduate school. >> so the cultural effects are more important than the political decisions that are going to be made in the coming years? caller: well, when you're in russia, you're watching russians watching american movies.

look at the effects of japan which is a close society is more americanized than the united states. when you're walking down the streets in china and they're watching american movies which has a tremendous impact. host: michael from new york city. we'll take the point. thanks for the call. dennis on twitter writes america's place in the world is as a corporate strong man. we coerce, reward, or invade to secure profit flow. if you have thoughts on america's place in the world, give us a call. american, the ren line, 202-737-0002. -- host: while you're calling in, want to certainly make note of the passing of a legend in journalism and leading most all of the papers today and that's

mike wallace. that from "the washington post" front page. 1918-2012. the headline is "journalist's piercing style inspired fear and respect." just want to read you a little bit of his life as you're calling in with these questions and comments. it starts off with for anyone hiding a secret, it was often said four of the most dreaded words in the english language were mike wallace is here. as the biggest star of "60 minutes," the longest running and most influential news show since it its debut, mr. wallace helped define journalism with an adversarial interviewing style that was as admired as it was feeder. he died in an assisted living facility in new cannon, connecticut. he had a history of heart ailments and in 2008, undergone a triple by past operation. "washington post" article goes on to talk about his many

interesting interviews over the years. one of his interview is ayotollah commander. -- host: towards the end, he said the most traumatic point of his career would you $120 million libel suit brought against cbs

by william moylan in vietnam for a segment mr. wallace hosted. in a broadcast in 1982, the uncounted enemy, a vietnam deception accused him of underestimating enemy troop numbers in vietnam. host: the last note in the story, the last paragraph is that the interview that mike wallace always want and never got was with pope john paul ii. i wanted to talk to him not just about being the pope but about other things, about acting, about politics, about celibacy and about skiing. i wanted to talk to him as a man. so several obituaries today on

mike wallace and several timelines of his life. one other one, this one from the "u.s.a. today" this morning has actually a rundown of mr. wallace's life through the years. born on may 9, 1918. his first "60 minutes" premiered on september 24th, 1968 with mr. wallace as an original correspondent. and his exclusive interview with iranian president earns him his 21st emmy award in august of 2006. and again, april 7, just two days ago, mr. wallace died at 93 in a care facility in connecticut. so again, you can read several of those obits today on the journalistic legend. but we want to get back to the phone about america's place in the world. want to know what you think. we're going to go to cliff on the republican line from

california. good morning. caller: good morning. well, without a change in leadership, our position is to continue to bow and apologize and scrape, to beg iran to negotiate with us while we stab our allies israel in the back and get played like a sucker by china and russia and continue our general path towards the direction of the e.u. which every liberal must ask him or herself what went wrong in the e.u. but with the change in leadership, we could pursue an aggressive energy policy to mobilize this nation like f.d.r. did in world war ii. this nation desperate for solution in energy production which creates great jobs, careers, even, high paying, with room for advancement, great benefits, pensions, health care, instead of wasting of hundreds of billons of dollars in bankrupt like solar trust and

the chevy volt which has suspended operation. host: cliff from brentwood, california. we'll go next on the democratic line to eddie from cumberland, maryland. good morning, eddie. caller: yes, good morning. how are you? host: good. caller: good. america still has a leading role in -- in other words in the overall world. it's our problem, basically mathematical. it deals with our monetary system. it really has to be changed to where it would have to be universal in governmental procurement put together. there is a package -- you think for a minute that america was going to stand back. universal power. and you think for a minute that they were not going to send anybody to take care of this? the ripple effects must be changed here in america and

there has been a package put together to change it. all we have to do is change it. it's bogged down in internal revenue in utah. use it. all we have to do is use it. it's a $67 trillion package. why don't you use it? what's wrong with you? host: eddie from confirm land, maryland. more thoughts coming in on america's place in the world on twitter. h. lee writes to borrow a phrase lead, follow, or get out of the way and walk softly and carry a big stick. let us live in peace and all will be ok. barring a few phrases for that comment on twitter today. we'll go back to the phones on the independent line. richie is from massachusetts. richie, your thoughts on america's place in a changing

global world. caller: the place in the global world should be none of our business to began with. we can't even take care of our country. we're fed up to our eyebrows. we've got the most corrupt government in the world and we're taking over countries, we're pushing people around and then we call ourselves leaders? our president is a full of -- and everything, we call ourselves the largest country in the world, we kill babies in their mother's womb? come on. we are the most corrupt country in the world and the american people got to wake up. do for yourself and make sure that you get yourself and not just rely on the government. host: richie, do you have hope for the future? caller: no. to be honest with you, sir, i'm 68 years old. i have no hope. i've seen this country when it was great, when i was growing up in the 1950's and now i see it

being destroyed by people. give me this, give me that. nobody wants to work. sue this, sue that. we're all on disability. this country is gone, sir, and i'm sorry to have to say that. host: you're an independent. do you think it's both sides? caller: oh, yes. definitely, sir. it's the whole government itself is just a ball of corruption. and it just keeps feeding and feeding and feeding. and i thank you for letting me speak and you have a nice day now. host: thanks, richie, on the independent line from mull vin, massachusetts. and chris from the independent line. caller: how are you doing today? host: good. caller: i'm a local public official in the state capital. it is the most trained state in the country. we have only now here of course.

and i just want to say very clearly that, you know, there are good things going on abroad. our former governor gary lock who is our ambassador to china, former cabinet member for commerce for obama administration is a person who is highly thought of in china as an example for where their future public official should go. and i think that there is a case to be made in the future of how we can influence other countries through better examples, not through the worse ones we've been hearing about but through people who have a concerted vision of what they would like to see the world to be and my work in water and potentially electric power, i know that we're trying to make things better for our citizens and i think there are many, many other people in the world who would like to follow that and use democracy in a positive way.

host: the "wall street journal" piece that we talked about earlier talked about some of those worst commls. -- examples what are the better examples? caller: we have been a guiding light in the past. even dealing with my republican father who has been skeptical of past republican administrations, even, that america's lost its way. i don't always agree with that because i can see that there are many things that are far worse in the world. not that it makes us better. we can lower our standards rather than make them better, but i would hope in the future that the influence of having democracy and having the ability to shine transparency on people's personal affair, this state does a very good job of public disclosure, for example. it is a way to move forward and to show people that democracy can be held accountable and i

wouldn't be an elected official if i didn't think otherwise. host: thanks for the call. we'll be getting into some of those issues of states and transparency and in a later discussion this morning on the "washington journal" about corruption in states. and whether certain states are doing a better job of putting safeguards in place to prevent some of that corruption. there was some news made on the political pact. former house speaker newt gingrich was on the sunday shows this weekend and here's the article from the "wall street journal" this morning. pass for romney getting clear. the fight for the republican presidential nomination appeared closer to a conclusion as newt gingrich on sunday all but conceded to mitt romney and rick

santorum continued facing a money shortage in his home state of pennsylvania where he had two weeks to make a last stand before the primary. mr. gingrich, the former house speaker called him the most likely republican during a tv appearance on fox news sunday. the article goes on to say that mr. gingrich who earlier this year briefly held a lead over his republican rival in nationwide polls spoke of his campaign in the past tense saying i'm glad i did this but i turned out to be much harder than i thought. he blamed his failure to win on mr. romney's fundraising advantage. i hit him as hard as i could, mr. gingrich said, he hit me as hard as he could. it turns out he had more things to hit with than i did. that was newt gingrich on the sunday shows yesterday. and we will be going to -- we have a segment of that,

actually, that we can show you from fox news sunday. mr. gingrich was also talking about his support for mr. romney if he stayed into that race. we'll go to that clip. >> well, i think you have to be realistic. given the number of primaries he's won, he is far the most likely republican nominee. and he does get to 144 delegates, i will support him. the primary goal of the entire republican party has to be to defeat president obama. >> now you have indicated that one of the reasons you're staying in the race is to influence the platform. how do you hope to do it? >> platform's a matter in the -- in a party's more than just a presidential candidate. senate candidates, house senates and -- >> again, that was newt gingrich

with his path to the nomination getting tougher and tougher and tougher. but wanted to point out an article in the "financial times" today. the headline there, gingrich refuses to drop out republican race and talks about his campaigning in delaware. a few other articles from the campaign trail before we get back to the phone call. i wanted to point out a front page story in the "new york times" today about the superpact that is supporting mitt romney starting an ad blitz on obama. america's crossroads is planning to begin its first major anti-obama advertising blitz of the year. a moment the obama re-election campaign has been guttering for -- girding for. with an anticipating bank account of more than 200 million, they will probably

began their campaign this month. -- host: again, that's a front page story in the "new york times". want to go back to the phones to this idea of america's place in the world. want to start with joe on the republican line from salt lake city, utah. good morning, joe. caller: good morning, sir. i just want to make your people aware of some facts they might not know. you watch the "10 commandments" on tv the other night? now rubin is the dedants of --

descend dens of israel come from rubin. the descendents from the united states comes from manassas and -- which were joseph's sons. host: joe, take us forward a few thousand years for me and talk about the future of america's place in the world. caller: well, i'm going right there. the end of the story is this. in the bible, you remember, that joseph got the birth right. see. and whoever had the birth right gets all the inheritance of the father and the family. well, a lot of the denominations run over to israel because they think israel's god's chosen people. but what a lot of people doesn't understand is joseph is the one that got the birth right and where the deden sents of joseph they're right here in the united states. host: joe with the lesson on

history. we'll go to tommy on the democratic line from augusta, georgia. what do you think about the future of the united states in the world? caller: yes. what i think about it is that the united states should be a beacon for the world. we should be an example. basically what you see in the united states now is that when this country started, everything was built towards racism towards the black man and everybody else. racism is such an evil religion. we need to not be prejudiced towards everyone. in the south, still people living to integrated schools with black people. these people were taught that they are better in any kind of shape, form, and fashion. but really, when did they stop thinking that they are equal to black folks? mitt romney, even in the mormon

religion is discrimination towards blacks. the united states need to get their own act together in order to be formed a perfect union where everybody's equal and have a chance. host: tomy, thanks so much. joe on twitter writes whatever our place is, it's not this. we tend to be unforgiving and belligerent like the world's school playground bully. we'll go to john on the independent line from pleasant prairie, wisconsin. good morning, john. caller: good morning. my point is basically that we are calling largely on our military to give us dominance well, well into the future. and there are two flaws with that. one is -- a new generation of weapon can come along and obsolete our navy, our air force, anything. it's happened many times in history.

simple things like the english with their fast ships against the spanish ships. when britain built the first boat and germany was even with them. and it drained their country's resources to rebuild their whole navy to -- and we're transferring so much technology to china and they're getting better and better at doing things. so they will -- they may well come up with a fighter plane of the future. it's far beyond anything we can imagine. we don't know. we have to first of all consider the immediate future and try to qall the whole world there in terms of what we have versus the entire world going to war with us. and the other thing is our economic system. we can't go around doing what we're doing.

for example, when britain and france decided to bomb libya after one week, they were out of bombs, ok? one week, they were out of jet fuel. so we had to rush it to them. and, you know, it's just crazy. i mean, yet they're sit in the cafes at night and living the good life and we're going broke buying all this stuff. i mean, if we're going to dominate the world, we've got to exact tribute. it's that simple. we should be reducing the actually debt, not just slowing its growth. we have to do that our minutes who areless. and then we're really having a problem. that's really what i want to say. thank you very much, c-span. host: john on the independent line there. monty writes in on this idea of

weapons. that the united states is using that the negative image we have create, we have created is that if you do not agree with us, we'll bomb you. has damaged our world respect and our credibility. again, that's monty on twitter. i want to go back to the campaign trail a little bit. we talked about newt gingrich. we want to talk about the other players in that republican primary is of course, former senator rick santorum. he's not on the campaign trail today and he was not on the campaign trail over the weekend. he has delayed his campaign for his ill daughter that you may have heard about. rick santorum will not campaign on monday so he can stay with his daughter, bella, who was admitted to the hospital on friday, his spokesman said. this is from today's "new york times." the campaign announced on friday that bella who is 3 years old and born with a scrome zonal disorder has been hospitalized.

she was also hopsed in january with pneumonia. the family has not made public the reason for the current hopping hospitalization. the lull in campaign comes as pressure has been mounting for mr. santorum to drop out of the republican presidential nominating contest in which he trails mitt romney and delegates -- few other campaign issues we're talking about and of course, the v.i.p. stakes is beginning in earnest with more and more teem thinking that mitt romney is on the path to the republican primary nomination. this is from the "new york

times" -- host: again, that's in the "washington times" if you want to read it by steven d erik nan -- denan. back to the phones, henry from

louisiana. caller: good morning. thanks for taking my call. i'm about 70 years old and i think america's place in the world has been a little lost since the post-world war ii. and it was the affluent society. for low price -- and i don't think our place in the world is foreign aid to every country in the world. we need it here now. host: thank you, henry. we'll go to jeffrey on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. you're speaking to jeffrey? host: yeah. caller: ok, thank you. allow me to speak my piece this

morning. host: go ahead. caller: thank you for c-span. you do a very good job. america's place in the world is not to be going over fascinating over people in other countries. perfect example. like my brother called from georgia. we have a man in florida that has not been arrested because of the crime he did against this black man. and i just haven't been throng my radio last night and had another hate crime down in oklahoma city. now we can go and try to get justice with people on another country but for him in america,

we've been having protestors for like all over the country just about. as far as i know, this man has not been arrested. host: you think these cases are hurting our place in the world right now with our international partners, jeffrey? caller: sure. sure. sure. because when they was having these marches down in florida, the whole world was watching it. and, you know, i come from mississippi just like my brother from georgia down there. and i see things right now that haven't happen to me and i'm 80 years old. it happened back when i was a

young man and it happened right now. i hear some conservatives feel always bringing up the black panthers. i don't remember the black panthers ever hanging a white man or killing a white man, not to my knowledge. the klan are still operating. these people that are killing african-americans, they're just doing it in a different way. host: jeffrey, let's keep this discussion to our place in the world right now. and we'll go right to kevin and get his thoughts on the independent line from fort lauderdale, florida. caller: thank you. i hope you can give me a minute here. i'm hearing a lot of things that really bothered me. one of the things is that yeah, we do need to start taking a look at what's going on within our country because here as the united states, one of the youngest countries besides israel, if you will, we are

stepping forward and we're taking a very big role and -- in our international affairs depending on how it affects us. but little things like what happened here in florida and what's going on in a lot of other states really does affect our world image and how we're able to be effective in influencing world affairs, which i think that we're doing a little too much of. i'm hearing a lot of history here, but one of the things that people need to remember is we do have to take a look at our past before we should start looking at our future and our role. we're republics but we preach democracy everywhere. we have candidates running for the republican office but we're not allowed to be part of the debate like buddy roamer. here we are. we're preaching one thing. we're going into countries and occupying or invading or

liberating, however anybody wants to view it, preaching one thing, but we're acting as something else. we're getting to a point where where we're almost going back to a con fredry, if you will. we broke away from england because money was overplacing power with the government there. capitalism overpowered socialism. and we need it a new way and we stepped forward and we gave the declaration of independence and we wrote our constitution to basically and still effect that all could benefit.

now our role has gone in reverse. we're taking away those rights in the pledge of allegiance with no disrespect to those in the 1950's that did this, they stated the words under god which was never originally there. we say that we are a nation under god which was never the intent of our forefathers. and our founding fathers because of that is going to hurt our position moving forward both militarily, politically and economically. host: kevin from fort lauderdale, florida, with a little bit more history for us today. comment on twitter from jose. he writes our strength is not the military, but our immense culture. the influence of this nation in the world will depend on how we behave. want to do one last story from the campaign trail for you. we showed you newt gingrich this morning on the sunday shows. the head of the democratic national committee debbie

wasserman-schultz was on the shows on cnn yesterday morning. we was talking about republicans focusing too much on winning the presidential election in november and what she says not enough on job creation. we'll show you a bit of that now. >> what's really bothersome to me is it almost seems like my republican colleagues in congress and mitt romney are rooting for economic failure. they've been hyperfocused on one job. barack obama's for really, the last two years. and we all need to be pulling together to focus on moving the economy forward for the middle class and for working families. and mitt romney's plans, the republican budget that they just put out in the house, their focused on making sure that billionaires and millionaires continue to do better. that's a huge contract. >> and back to the phones in the five minutes we have left here, talking about this idea of america's place in the world.

thee you is on the democratic line from port clinton, ohio. good morning, theo. caller: my comment would be i would ask people what would the world be like if there was not a powerful united states? this country certainly has a lot of flaws and it has been aggressive in many ways, but it seems to be kind of mediating force in the background that ensure oh, the democratic ideas that came out in then lightment period and the free market ideas that came out of the enlightenment period. i would just think if this country's power waned and it was not for us to represent those ideals, i would have a question that they would continue. that's my comment. host: thank you, theo. on the international front, a few international headlines for you while we have you. the rocket launch in north korea

that is going to be getting headlines all week long. it's scheduled to happen between april 12 and april 16. we don't know exactly when. this is the a.p. story as it appeared in the "washington times." north korean space official moved all three rockets for a controversial launch to push ahead with their advance -- host: that's a story that's going to be appearing all week in the papers as we await to see what happens from that launch. one other story i should point out from the "new york times" on this same issue. south korea sees signs that north may test nuclear devices as well as rocket. that's the headline from the

"new york times" today. north korea appears to be preparing for its third underground nuclear test even as it presses ahead with assembling a long range rocket for its planned launch of a satellite this month, a south korean spokesman said sunday. that's in the "new york times" if you want to read more about that activity, which seems to be happening alongside with the rocket launch. and one other story on the international front. we talked a bit this morning about the american military role in the world. one role that's going on right now is the role of u.s. soldiers during night raids. it's been a touchy issue in the war in afghanistan. this from the "wall street journal." afghanistan and the u.s. on sunday signed a breakthrough deal giving the afghan government greater oversight of controversial night raids setting the raid for long-term agreement. after months of difficult talks, they agreed to give judges more power to regulate the raids

curtail u.s. military serges of afghan homes and restrict the forces to directly interinvestigate detainees the deal breaks a log jam for the nations to find what role the u.s. will play after most foreign troops withdraw by 20 14. it marks the most significant attempts so far to hand critical operations over to afghans as they try to take the lead role in fighting the taliban-led urgency. that's the "wall street journal." we'll go back to the phones for one more comment on america's role in the world. this is gilbert on the independent line from tulsa, oklahoma. good morning. caller: good morning. three things, if i may. one is our military industrial complex. we have more than 122 military bases all over the world. why are we still in japan? why are we still in europe?

we're spending billons and billons and billons of dollars on the military industrial complex. secondly, our country is a capital lisk country. so they will go -- capitalistic country. so they will go where they can make the most money. so we fall in line where slavely is slavely is close to being in existence. the people are making less than 26 cents an hour, making those nike shoes. and we are falling apart in our infrastructure in this country. there's not one expressway, not one bridge that is absolutely 100%. and thirdly, and more importantly, why are we bending over backwards for a non-christian country like israel? israel runs and dictates to this country and we fall a lock step behind them.

this is why the rest of the world is looking at us. israel can do whatever it wants to but iran can't again get one nuclear weapon. host: that's gilbert on the independent line from tulsa, oklahoma, talking about this conversation we've had in the first 45 minutes about the future of the u.s.'s role in world affairs. we want to end that conversation there. up next, we're going to have discussion about the overuse of health care treatments and screenings. we'll be right back. >> and its effects on women and children. >> there's a number in the fact sheet that i share with folks.

in 1990, the average member of congress have net worth of $250,000 excluding their homes. by 2010, the average member of congress have a net worth of $750,000 excluding their home so what happens to congress that they could triple their wealth in just a 20-year period? meanwhile for the rest of us, the average person has income excluding their home about $20,000 both in 1990 and in 2010. so everybody else stayed level but these members of congress found a way on the rich themselves. i'm not hating on members of congress. i'm not hating on wealth. but here's what i'm saying. people who have that kind of wealth understand somebody who needs an extra $40 in their bi-weekly checks to take the bus. [applause] >> you can watch the whole event tonight starting at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> the vast majority of consumers in the 90% are ok with

this concept that the social networks and companies like google provide free services like web-based e-mail services like mapping services, like search service asks they do that for free because they're able to sell non-personally identifiable information about the things that you do on the internet. >> this is hardly my view with respect to the concerns about the change in google's privacy policy. you had 36 state attorneys general objecting. i don't think they're in europe, by the way. i think those are states within the u.s. you have congressional leaders in the democratic and republican party objecting. you had 60 consumer organizations from the united states and europe objecting. >> open internet collisions -- coalitions on google's new privacy policy, providing free services for its users for violating their privacy.

tonight on "the communicators" on c-span2. >> "washington journal" continues. host: and dr. john santa of "consumer reports" health rating center talks about a new report his group helped commission about the use of unnecessary medical tests. dr. santa, explain to us what you're recommending in this new report. guest: we're pleased to be involved in a campaign called choosing wisely. nine professional societies representing more than 300,000 physicians. were there as consumers along with 11 other consumer organization. and what happened last week was the nine professional societies each identified five areas in which there's unnecessary or overused care occurring. and articulated those situations

in which they hope that physicians and patients will have conversations that would lead to more appropriate use. host: and dr. santa, we're going to put a graphic up for the viewers to show what we're talking about here. we're talking about the u.s. health care costs in general in 2011. your report note that costs were about 18% of g.d.p. and that there's an estimated $550 billion in waste per year. and that waste from looking at your report is on -- if several different places but we're talking about with the report is this overuse or this overtreatment and overtreatment accounts for an estimated $1508 billion to $226 billion in waste each year in health care costs. and we've got a graph here we're going to show our viewers to

help them sort of understand this a little bit. but while they're looking at this, can you tell us what prompted this study? why is this coming out now? >> well, many experts in studies recently have articulated what you just said, that up to 30% of health care products and services may not be necessary. and that hundreds of billons of dollars. and i think the profession can feel this. consumers can feel this. health care costs are becoming very significant for the man on the street. and these professional societies are stepping up to the plate and trying to eat it i their areas in their own discipline that is a better approach than more.

our system ended up being very expensive with both physicians and patients at times asking for or ordering tests and treatments that are not necessary. host: and dr. santa, your report, the report from the campaign notes that about 30% of care delivered is unnecessary. a lot of implications to the recommendations you're making. but one question i have off the top is aren't these medical professionals hurting their own bottom line by encouraging patients not to get so many treatments? what's the incentive for you all to put this out? guest: well, that's right. and that's what's so unique here. the nine professional societies are membership societies as i mentioned, they represent more

than 300,000 physicians. and in the past for the most part, they recommended things to do. things that would increase revenue to their members. here, they're reversing course in saying it's time to be more prudent. and their recommendations are in many cases going to affect the bottom line of their members. and i can imagine some of their members this week are wincing a bit as they think of the potential impact on their incomes. but we're not going to control health care costs without all of us giving up something. and i think these nine professional societies are courageous to take this first step. from a "consumer reports" point of view, this is right up our alley for 75 years, we've been identifying products and services that industry markets that work well or don't work well. and we're very pleased to be

part of this effort and while we have the advantage here of really, the world's experts identifying themselves what they can do better. so we think this is a very unique moment in terms of changing our health care system around. host: dr. santa, we're going to promo the lines on screen there so people can call in and ask questions about this. but give us a few examples of the unnecessary medical tests from the -- rigg it was 45 recommendations that were put out. guest: sure. one category is screening tests. these are tests that are done in people who are healthy, who want to detect something early, prevent it from becoming a problem. for example, an e.k.g., a heart tracing is a great test if you have symptoms. if you have heart disease. if you have a lot of risk factors for heart disease. but it's not a very good test in someone who doesn't have

symptoms, doesn't have heart disease, isn't at high risk. in fact, it's more likely to confuse a physician and that patient rather than clarify anything and i'm an internist. that's the test that i ordered and did a lot and it's time for us to not be doing e.k.g.'s on a routine basis, on an annual physical, for example. the same is true of screening stress tests. again, on people who are at low risk, no symptoms, no heart disease. so screening tests are a big area. a second is diagnostic tests. oftentimes, patients are either asking our doctors or suggesting that diagnostic tests like imaging tests be done if you have an uncomplicated headache, if you have fainted, if you have low-back pain. in all three cases, it turns out that imaging and really does not

help. in fact, again, it's more likely to confuse and shows something that has nothing to do with the problem or there's the potential for the film to confuse the patient and physician. and diagnostic tests. host: and all 45 of these recommendations can be found at the website www.choosingwisely.org. if folks want to take a look at those. this fall, your group is going to put out another 40 recommendations from a whole other set of professionals? guest: that's right. and "consumer reports" is going to be issuing throughout the spring, summer, and fall easy to understand consumer oriented translations to many of these topics so that consumers can more easily understand what's going on.

four of those are ready now. the topics are anbiotics imaging in headache and screening e.k.g.'s. host: let's go to the phones. there's some folks with questions about these recommendations. we'll start with rob on the democratic line from chula vista, california. good morning, rob. caller: good morning. thank you, c-span, and thank you, dr. santa. partially, -- personally, i've been overtested, overmedicated. i recently -- i have a wasting away disease -- illness. they did a bone marrow biopsy, inconclusive. and the cost is exorbitant. i had 21 doctors, 17 diagnoses which i do not believe most of them. and i hope that this comes to a stop. do you see in the future a more

-- i know if you have a liver problem or pancreatic cancer, do you see the overtesting? guest: we'll see. -- guest: -- host: dr. santa? guest: well, the listener sounds like he has a more complex set of problems than the 45 topics are meant to identify. what we certainly hope is to reduce the likelihood that patients will be tested and enter a sequence like this individual has that results in more and more tests and treatments that confuse rather than clarify. and this can happen.

for example, again, with the e.k.g. example, you might see some mild abnormality on an e.k.g. other tests will then be done that again, can show mild abnormalities. you end up having an angie gram. the angie gram shows that you have a modest blockage in a heart artery which it turns out many of us do. that's the nature of the fatty don'ts in our artery. it doesn't mean that don't is going to cause you to a heart attack. host: monty says the heart disease are called silent killers. no signs. it has saved many lives.

are you running into that pushback as you put these recommendations out? guest: well, we are. that's an interesting comment because it actually turns out that while the listener is correct in terms of heart disease being a silent disease, symptoms are key in terms of whether our tests and treatments can offer anything. for example, many patients may not realize that angioplasty and stint, even bypass surgery for heart disease primarily helps with symptoms. primarily helps with symptoms. its effect on longevity is limited to a very small group of folks.

are likely to have problems. many us will live long and fruitful and productive lives and die of something other than heart disease. and yet, if you look at our heart, we would have some abnormalities in our coronary arteries. just because you have abnormalities in your coronary arteries doesn't mean that you should have angioplasty and stint or you should have heart surgery. host: let's go back to the phones and open it up for a few

more comments. caller: when you're talking about all the testing, overuse of testing, i think doctors need to do their own thing and make their own decisions. there are books written about how americans eat causing inflammation in our arteries or veins. this is the problem with the high blood pressure, coronary problems. i am a medical technologist. i worked in the field 26 years. i monitored my own blood work. i responded until i reached a certain point where my cholesterol was rising at. put me on a specific product that caused an increase in my sugar. you know this information in. not the average american person

knows this. i just keep abreast of what is happening in the medical field because i'm still working not as a medical technologist, but i am a salesperson. i will hang up. please give me your comments on this. i think doctors need to do their own practice of medicine. i'm not bashing the pharmaceutical companies. we do need them. but a different approach in terms of trying to educate folks is needed. you must know that years ago, 30 years or 40 years ago, prices were so much different in trying to get testing done versus now. that has a lot to do with inflation and the value of the dollar. host: thanks. guest: the listener made a number of excellent comments for. it, she's right -- first, she's

right that a variety of organizations, the incentives they have created, have led to a very expensive system and a system where oftentimes doctors are encouraged to do more than they should. there's also the issue of advertising and promotions. dimensions the pharmaceutical companies. we believe part of the reason for the challenges we had is advertising and promotion confuses consumers and doctors. it ends up causing folks to go into the doctors and asked for drugs and tests about those drugs that another group of people need but they don't need. it is hard for doctors to say no. all those issues have led to the problems we have. we agree with the listener, it is time for doctors and patients to make these decisions. that is what we are trying to stimulate it. we are not doing this with any

intention of these recommendations finding their way to insurance companies or the government's. fact, we are emphatic about let's let doctors and patients talk to each other. what we are trying to do is help them identify what should they talk about and when. because some of these tests and treatments are very useful for one set of people but not useful at all for another. so this is something that doctors and patients free of advertising and promotion, hopefully at some point in a system that has more logical and incentives will get right. host: we're talking with dr. john santa, director of the help trading center at "consumer reports." you say we should let the conversation between the doctor and patient. want to ask about the issue of liability and the doctors being worried about being sued. scott asks on twitter --

guest: it absolutely does. it is a major reason why doctors are hesitant when a patient says i want this test for this treatment. it's a major reason why doctors are reluctant to say no. realize that it works both ways. if doctors order treatments or tests that are not save or are confusing or lead to harm, then they will suffer potentially from malpractice in those cases, too. it is a dilemma. our malpractice system is another factor in what has caused all this. again, we are not in this campaign taking a position on how that should be done. we think foreshore from a malpractice point of view that

conversation and good communication between doctors and patients are the key to preventing malpractice and preventing malpractice lawsuits. once again, we thing where we are headed, we hope that will eliminate one of the problems that is created this from the first place back. host: lakota wichita, kansas, bill. caller: the problem in the medical industry is in up doctors, not over use of health care procedures. i said in a wheelchair today with the worst bone deterioration ever seen in a human being. both femurs, both tips, and more, because of 15 years of negligence and buffoonery on behalf of the doctors. -- both hips. guest: you're right that there are problems in terms of a

subset of doctors not performing well. at consumer reports, we are very interested in eventually getting the information about which doctors are the ones that consumers need to be wary of. that is a separate issue from the choosing wisely campaign. again, from the consumer reports perspective, i would totally support the concern that you have expressed. we don't know enough about the performance of doctors. the system is not sufficiently transparent when it comes to which doctors are struggling and which ones are not. we should have a public system for reporting performance. we should have a better system of identifying which doctors are

not performing well at surgery. from a "consumer reports point of view, we are pleased to be reporting data on a 360 heart surgery groups who have the best data system developed so far of performance on heart surgery. they have agreed to make it public's. so they are telling consumers about the factors that go into success or failure in heart surgery, the same information they evaluate each other on. they're making it public to "consumer reports" and on their own website, the society for atherosclerosis surgeons. i share your pain and concern.

i recognize it as a significant factor. host: all the recommendations that your group put out, you can see at their web site. you can look into all the necessary medical examinations that dr. santa's group is talking about. go to nicholas on the democratic line in new jersey. caller: good morning. my question is about generic drugs i was taking. i had been taking them several years, the same drugs. in december i got a letter from aarp or some other group like that, telling me i was paying $7 for each one of these prescriptions and they were working very well. now they're telling me they're going to move the generic drug bet i'm paying $7 to i would

paying $92 to one of them and $42 for the other. i called several people trying to find out why this was happening. they gave me the other drugs to take, which i tried and they did not work. one of the drugs i'm taking is a time release drug. i'm on an anti coagulant drug. i called them. and i called the person in my district, i called his office in washington, told him everything i'm telling you. say they will get back to me. i'm still waiting to hear from them. i would like to know if if you know anything about this. thank you. guest: well, that is a very interesting sequence of events. normally, we think of generic drugs as the most expensive and most cost-effective way to get health care. what the listener has described is a very unusual set of events. it has certainly happened.

out knowing more specifics about the drugs involved, i am not able to comment on this situation specifically. but there have been some circumstances in which generic drugs that were formerly inexpensive became much more expensive, usually because only one company was left making it, and so, there were able to increase the prices. there are also interesting things going on at some of the most popular brand drugs turning generic in the next couple years. brand companies are doing a variety of things to keep people using their brand drug rather if than going to the generic. host: to go back to your recommendation, a comment from jason on twitter --

no, quite the contrary. what we are emphasizing is that we are identifying screening tests that people don't need that could harm them. what we need to do is get out of the mindset that in all cases more health care is better, more testing is better, more treatment is better. that is not the case. sometimes more testing can be worse, more treatment can be worse. and if there's any group of people who need just the right amount of health care, is low- income people. we certainly don't want to be wasting the limited resources they have in the limited time they have on tests that just don't work well. on the contrary, our effort is to try and get it just right. people don't want too much or to littleo health care, they want

it just right. in some areas we are giving them to mucho. we are trying to bring that more into a reasonable boundary. host: let's hear from john in houston, texas, on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. i have been an emergency position 20 years. my dilemma is the fact that every patient that comes to the emergency department is like a new patient to me and i have to evaluate their non-specific symptoms from a broad difference of diagnosis in determining what the cause of their symptoms is. how do you factor than in? i see a lot of practice in emergency medicine that other people might consider as over treatment or unnecessary. to meet it is on a lot of having that broad differential

and then working your way down to a specific cause of the patient posing presenting symptoms. i was wondering if that was anything that was affected by these guidelines. guest: good question. certainly practicing medicine in an emergency setting is a challenging and a different setting. most of the recommendations that have come out last week do not relate to emergency. in fact, most of them would relate more to screening and primary care and office care and the care of patients who are more stable and have symptoms and problems that are not emergencies. there are certainly some that are relevant, because, unfortunately, as the listener knows, many times the emergency room physicians are put in the position of doing primary care.

for example, antibiotics for mild to moderate sinusitis, which emergency doctors see because people go for colds and upper respiratory infections, so antibiotics are not a good idea for that. it exposes patients to risks and costs a significant amount of money in some cases, and does not make any difference in terms of the outcome. so there are some of these topics that are relevant to emergency room physicians. host: bob on our independent line from quaker town, pennsylvania. caller: thanks for taking my call. i just wanted to pass on a term that an old surgeon that i used for a while used. he called these things incidentaloma, things that show on expensive machines but

really are meaningless and will never give you any problem if they are best ignored. i just wanted to say that. and thanks for c-span. host: we will go to cynthia on the democratic line from louisville, ky. caller: good morning i am a medicare patient. i went in on a friday evening because i had a hernia in my navel. it was somewhat painful and they gave me pain medication. then we went to x-ray. she did six x-rays and i said, why so many x-rays? she said, i messed up. then i was marched straight to have a body scan. this is for a simple bellybutton hernia.

$3,000 they billed medicare. i think the point needs to be made that these "non-profit" should beorp'orations paying taxes. my goodness, they are advertising their executive pay. i hope someone will investigate their unnecessary cost, because it was just ridiculous what i was put through for a simple bellybutton hernia, which was done successfully that night. host: these are the issues you are talking about? guest: well, this particular problem is not one of the 45. the key thing that the listeners that here was that she was having pain in her hernia. my guess is that the doctor seeing her was concern that a piece of her bowel might have been stuck in that hernia. that can be a very significant

and in some cases life- threatening problem. it is rare. it sounds like, in defense of the doctors and hospital here, they did a lot of testing to make sure that was not the case. the approach to solving the problem would have changed if there was any evidence that there was bowel in a hernia and it was obstructed. the point that the listener makes are good ones, though. we know there's a lot of concern among consumers about hospitals, about hospitals that advertise, about hospitals that project more of a business approach than a community approach, about the compensation of folks who work at the hospitals, including the leadership. and we are very concerned about errors and safety issues at

hospitals. so it is a complex and a tricky situation when it comes down to a one-on-one like what happened here. it's hard for me to say whether the testing in this case was excessive. but the listener makes a number of good points. host: your list that you put out on choosing wisely was praised today in the lead editorial of the new york times. i want to make sure to show that. the title being "do you need that test?" nine major physician groups have identified 45 tests or procedures commonly used and have no proven benefit for many patients -- i want to go to another article from the new york times recently that talked about this issue. there was concern by a cancer

patient interviewed in that story about your list. it says -- guest: that is a legitimate concern, but i don't think it is a concern that what we are doing deserves. in fact, if the reader or listener looks at the first topic that comes from the american society of clinical oncology, that topic focuses on patients with solid tumors,

which breast cancer would-be. and it basically says that patients who have received all the evidence-based intervention and are not appropriate for a clinical trial and there is no longer anything that can be offered to them that is based on science, those patients should consider not . continuing not so, within that topic, the american society of clinical oncology makes it clear that they believe patients should enter experimental trials when they are corporate. but they also,, i think, but there's a point in cancer treatment when more is not better. more may be worse. we know that from a variety of other studies. whether you have cancer or

chronic kidney disease, with the american society of nephrology also weighed in on in this process, you have to be careful about overtesting and overtreatment. kudos to the oncologist for acknowledging that even in cancer you have to be cautious about overdoing it. host: we have about five or 10 minutes with dr. john santa of the consumer reports help ratings center. colleen is on the republican line from greenwich village, illinois. caller: hi. we knew about this about a month ago. my husband is a retired surgeon. it is my understanding that while tests are sometimes unnecessary, the doctors who persuade patients not to get these tests will be given half of what that procedure is worth. that sounds like. like.

i also think there's going to be more lawsuits. could you address this? guest: well, i am not aware of any arrangement of this sort which you have described. and certainly to the best of my knowledge, the american board of internal medicine foundation and the consumer organizations involved and nine professional societies are not aware of those kinds of arrangements. again, our emphasis would be that we are not doing this to help insurance companies or the government. what we are doing this for is to help individual physicians and individual patients have better conversations about these tough issues. as i said earlier, there's no question that we are asking doctors to do things that might make them a bit uncomfortable

when it comes to malpractice. but we are also pointing out that if you do tests that are not necessary and those lead to unnecessary treatment, that is a malpractice risk, too. doctors have to do their best to get it right. the best way to do that is to make sure you have a well- informed youwho understands the pros and cons. we think the time is right to do that. that's what we want to help with. host: dna is on the independent live from jackson, michigan. -- dan. caller: good morning. had problems with vitamin d deficiency. the university clinics that i went to in michigan did not do of vitamin d. test. as a result, i had dental work done and bone grafts that were all failing as a result of a vitamin d deficiency. my dentist had to intercede

because they would not do the test -- i had a thyroid disease in the past, so it was not connected. the dentist senate to a clinic and i had a major vitamin d deficiency. after getting that result, all the bone grafts were successful. this is an illustration of a medical group that does not do the tests because it is not on their guidelines. as a result, it cost a lot more money for the medical system. i would like to hear your comments on that. guest: that's a good question. it highlights an important difference. first of all, there is no vitamin d topic in the 45 that came out last week. but your situation is a

diagnostic situation, not a screening situation. the fact that you had parathyroid surgery in the past means that for the rest of your life, any doctor seeing you should have high on your list that you can have as a calcium or vitamin d problem and should have sorted through that. in your case, sadly, you suffer because the diagnosis sequence was not done correctly or in a timely way. this would have been a screening issue. to the best of my knowledge, i don't think anyone is suggesting that the vitamin d levels be determined on normal folks who have no problems and no history of the kind of surgery that you had been. once you have had paraby roy surgery, calcium and vitamin d. metabolism should be at the top of the doctors list.

-- parathyroid surgery. host: on the democratic line now from new jersey. caller: well, i just want to say in 2006, i experienced what i thought was corporal tunnel. the result of that, they sent me to occupational medicine. i was repeatedly going to her because of this. she could not find anything, but told me it was all in my head. my doctor finally in 2010 decided to have me go for an mri and found out i have three bulging disks in my neck. if i am wondering why she did not do it and why it took so long. all the time that i was working, i was making my disks

worse. host: if you can, dr.. guest: this is an example of a diagnostic sequence gone bad. i suspect the listener had pain and numbness in her hand. they thought it was corporal tunnel syndrome. she did not respond. the folks around her were overly bought into that diagnosis. rather than looking at alternatives, they suggested that she was overemphasizing her symptoms. then they find out that actually she has a problem in her neck. this is an example of poor communication. doctors always need to be questioning a diagnosis. when a patient does not respond to treatment, one of the options they need to think about is that we got the diagnosis wrong. that did not happen here. this is not corporal tunnel and these kind of problems are not in the 45, but it is a good

example of the importance of good doctoring related to diagnosis. host: dr. santa is the director of the health rating center at consumer reports. you can see all the recommendations at their web site. thanks for joining us. up next, a discussion on measuring integrity in state governments. first, a news update from c-span radio. >> its data caught 30 2:00 a.m. eastern. an update on airtran's nuclear program. their nuclear chief says it's envoys' may bring a compromise offer to talks this week with a world powers. in a proposal that promises to eventually stop producing the most highly enriched uranium but not totally abandoning their ability to make nuclear fuel. the program is outlined late yesterday. talks are scheduled to begin on friday between perrin and the five permanent security council members plus germany. as diplomacy continues on the iranian nuclear program, there's word a second aircraft carrier

is being deployed to the persian gulf. a commander of the fifth fleet says the deployment of the nuclear-powered uss enterprise, along with the abraham lincoln carrier strike group marks the fourth time in the past decade that the navy has had two aircraft carriers operating at the same time in the region. here in the nation's capital, lots of children and families from across the country are coming to the white house for the annual easter egg roll. today's event is the largest for the public on the white house grounds. 30,000 people are expected. this year's theme is "let's go, let's play, let's move." it encourages physical activity and is part of first lady michelle obama's initiative against childhood obesity. c-span is covering the event later in our programming schedule. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. >> tonight on c-span, kravis smiley lead the discussion on poverty in america and its effects on women and children.

-- tavis smiley. >> there's a number that i share. in 1990, the average member of congress had a net worth of $250,000 excluding their house. by 2010, the average member of congress had a net worth of $750,000 excluding their house. what happens to congress that they could triple their wealth in 20 years? for the rest of us, meanwhile, the average person has an income of $20,000, in 1990 and in 2010 both. everybody else state level, but the members of congress found a way to and themselves. i'm not haney on members of congress or wealth, but people who have that kind of wealth don't understand somebody who needs an extra $40 to catch the bus. >> you can watch the whole event tonight starting at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span.

>> "washington journal" continues. host: bill hughes and burke from the center of republican dirty and to talk about this group posted recently released state integrity report. -- mr. buzenberg. what are we measuring in this new report? guest: there's corruption in various states. lots of people have gone to jail. we thought it was important to look at the laws in each state. we have done a corruption risk index. we looked at 330 integrity indicators in every state to try to judge what is the risk of corruption. each state. we did it by hiring reporters, experienced state house reporters in every state. they went in and did this data analysis, 330 different integrity indicators. we compiled it and then we

provided a great fervor state. you can look at it and see what is the potential risk of corruption in each state. that is something. we had two great partners. global integrity. they do a corruption risk index for the world. also, public radio international, which has stations all over the country. those are our partners in this project. you can see it all at stateintegrity.org. host: this is a wrap up of prominent people have gone to jail over the years for corruption. -- this is not. guest: that's right. it's about what are the transparency and accountability laws in each state. we are looking going forward. host: 01 to give some of the results of this survey that you did. not a single state and earned a grade of "a." only five states aren't a b. 18 states -- 19 states received

c's. 8 states earned 59 or below, which would been an f. probably the most surprising grade in there is that new jersey came out on top as the state with the least potential for corruption. explain how that is in a post- sopranos . sopranos guest: we all have a perception about new jersey, but what we are looking at is the laws in that state. it is because they have had such corruption and so many problems and scandals of, there have been a lot of very good laws passed in new jersey. good government groups and the government there has put in place a lot of very good laws. they came out with a "b" at the top of the list of the 50 states based on laws they have on the books. i think they got something got for theg six a's work they done.

other states could emulate those laws and do better. host: take us through this report card. the viewers can see it here on the screen. how the report card works and what some of the categories mean. guest: if you click on new jersey, you can see that they get a's for procurement, lobbying, pension-fund management, ethics enforcement, redistricting. they give low grades for their political financing, does accountability, and legislative accountability, c's. it's not perfect. it does not mean everything their works exactly the way it should. these are state governments, after all. in fact, the laws they have are tough. the ethics they enforce are much tougher. i think you could contrast this with a state near the bottom that gets an f and you'll see a big difference in the kind of transparency and accountabilit that the is available in those states. host: if we're talking about

arrests for corruption, this is a report compiled by the department of political science with the university of illinois at chicago," new jersey would rank fairly high with 909 convictions for corruption from 1976 through 2020. this is the potential for corruption and not arrests, again. tickets through the worst performing. guest: let me just respond to that. this is only measuring state governments, not cities or municipalities. five state legislatures have been convicted or pleaded guilty since 2004. so there are problems in new jersey. but a lot of the numbers that you mentioned are at the municipal and county level. but this is focusing on state government. host: the worst performing state on your list was georgia with a rank of f,. why did it perform so poorly? guest: if you click on georgia

and go there, i think they have 10 f's. public access to information, legislative accountability, civil service management, lobbying disclosure, pension- fund management, ethics enforcement, insurance commission, redistricting. the highest grade they got was a b for internal auditing. virginia is another one that has lack of transparency and accountability in the laws of those states, serious issues. what we are doing is calling attention to that and comparing it to other states. washington state. there are many states that have good laws on the books and they're trying to crack down on this. we are trying to show off the difference between the good states and those that have work to do. five states since our report came out two weeks ago have already started the process of reform. we're seeing laws introduced,

changes coming. they took our reports their sleep. south carolina, we got a note from someone in the legislature, a letter that said we looked at this, we see where we stand, we realize south carolina has work to do, we are passing laws if, we're introducing laws, we're looking at changes in laws that will make us something like an ethics commission and have it working. not only did degrade the laws, but we also looked at whether they are enforced. public access to information is one that legislatures tend to put in a lot of loopholes and those loopholes allow the state government not to have to provide information to citizens. so it is a snapshot of where we are in this country and i think at a level that has never been done before. host: we're talking with mr. dos mr. buzenberg.

if you have a question, give us a call. if you are outside the u.s. and want to talk about corruption in the states, there's a line for you. we want to get to a daylong the democratic line from georgia in that worst performing state. caller: yes, i am from cedartown. the last four elections we had, we have used the voting machines in our state. there were found to be faulty if not fraudulent back when all the republicans got into office when george bush got in to be president.

what i would like to know is what we can do when putting republicans in charge and there will not even bring up the question of having the voting machines replaced or whatever. the democrats will not either. i voted three times on the machines and i got a call from of the voting or whatever you call it. he told me that i had not voted in the last three elections. host: something strutted when your folks looked at georgia? guest: unfortunately, we did not go into the voting machine issue. but it calls attention the need for independent outside ethical looks at states and state government. you need independent checks. the legislature towards themselves may not be as careful as they should be on these same sort of issues, but an

independent ethics commission could do something like that. we did not look at the election process in each state, but we are not done. that would be a very good addition to this if we go forward with the project, which i would like to do. host: he spoke about letter grades in georgia. can you give us a specific example where you felt georgia was falling down? guest: ethics enforcement agencies, do they have a strong independent ethics enforcement agency that can operate? . . they don't. just about half the about halfd's and -- about half the state got hit had's and f's. it should not be one person running it who could possibly take political contributions to

make decisions about the state pension. that would be something you would want independent. this is really for citizens to look at. all the information is on line. it was not just compiled by reporters, it was also produced by independent peers in each state. it is a very serious look. all the comments are there and all the grades and questions are there. we came up with 16,500 datapoint and made it all available. host: you said that one trend you found across the states was that if there was a history of corruption, it helped them put safeguards in place. what were some other trends? guest: on the other end, the dakotas don't have a big history of corruption. in fact, they don't have a lot of laws. they would say, we are able to know everybody in the state, we don't need all the laws that new

jersey needs. they may be right about that, but if you have someone in office and wanted to abuse the situation, they would be will to do it without a lot of laws on the books. states like those got low marks, but they don't have a very big history of corruption. i think they are little upset with some that. host: we have north dakota and you listed them with a failing grade at 58%. south dakota is even farther behind with a failing grade of just 50%. guest: again, at because they have a big history of corruption. it's because they don't have the laws on the books, in part because they not had a history of corruption and. so degrade them higher as a risk of corruption. host: let's go to david from birmingham, alabama on the democratic line. caller: yes, good morning. i would like to say that georgia is leading the nation in banks going under. the problem is all the

politicians in georgia are under the good old boy system, the republicans. they make deals with the government. the senators, all these people got million-dollar loans they cannot pay back, as a favor from the government. it is a scam they are running in georgia with these politicians. if you really look at it, all of them have investments in the bank's. these senators. johnny isaacson, paul price. all these people are tied up with the banks. host: you're not surprised that george's last? caller: if an investigation was going, you would see that all the republican politicians in georgia -- tom gray, there was recently an article in the newspaper about him taking loans and things. the house speaker in georgia, all these people are corrupt and under this good old boy system

and it's tied into a penal colony system. the banks and even the parole board man, they were charged with all different types of privileges and things. you said that some state governments have responded to this, but it seems like the public, also, seems to have a very strong reaction to the report. guest: the public has a stake in this information. they need to understand what is happening in their state of. this gentleman can point to a number of problems, it sounds like. i would point to the need for accountability and transparency. what are the political contributions? what are their conflicts of interest? those are things in transparency and accountability laws. georgia has the worst loss in the nation in that area. something like when regretted them on the state insurance commission and the pension-fund management, those are issues linked to banking.

it would be important to understand the political contributions for those funds and state funds go. he is just pointing out that we have problems at our state level and it does need a focus on it. one of the reasons for doing this project is so many fewer reporters are reporting at the state government level. state after state, we are seeing newspapers eliminating positions, eliminating reporters in the statehouse able to focus on this. so you have less investigative reporting going on. that's one of the reasons we did this project. host: he brought the issue of partisan politics as well. don on twitter rights -- -- writes -- did you find this broke down along a party line? guest: we did not find that and we're not even saying that in the report. some states have democrats and others have republican spirit that is not an issue we have sorted out that way.

i don't think you can find that in the study. host: talk about the center for public integrity and what you do their. guest: we are 22-year-old investigative news organization. we do major projects, getting data and documents, and then doing an investigation. those investigations show all over in the washington post or the new york times or "the huffington post" or npr, and the news hour. people use our work. right now we have a big project looking at money and politics in the super pacs. that is an area where we see a lot of money. host: where do you get your funding? guest: from foundations primarily and individuals. we also have some ads on our website and some revenue streams, but those are small. its foundations and individuals who believe in this. we don't really take corporate money or anonymous money. we show where the money's coming from and that is how we are supported. host: back to the phones. al is on the republican line for

mare island. good morning. caller: >> if you could tell me where does road island rate? second, the bloody seyantes radio program -- buddy seya nt -- seyantees radio program -- there should be an audit of every state showing waste and how its performance. i think you guys are doing a great job. sofitel me where rhode island is rated. guest: c grade, 75%. they are ninth from the top. the state'sme f's in civil service management, not good.

but there's a lot of b's band b +'s. executive accountability guests a c. judicial accountability gets a d-. the state insurance commissioner gets a c +. redistricting gets the only "a." host: now to michigan, good morning. caller: we have a governor

literally taking over five or six cities. you no longer have a mayor or commissioners. with no explanation, we are going to come in and do this and he's done it. governor schneider. i was curious where we fall on this list when considering corruption, told disregard for the constitution. guest: i think we have done some reporting about what is going on in michigan. a big change in the situation. michigan received an f with 58%. they have a series of f's for executive accountability, judicial accountability, states civil service management, state pension fund management, state insurance commission. host: when you say executive

accountability, explain that. guest: there's a series of questions in there about what you have to disclose, what can the public see? are you subject to public information inquiries and freedom of information requests? it is question after question. these are just the 14 main categories. under these are 330 questions. i would urge you to dig into it. click on it, you go and you can see all the answers. there's a lot behind these letters and numbers that i'm giving you, which are just the top of them. legislature accountability is also a failing grade as well as political financing. michigan is one of three states in this country that does not require all of the disclosures, conflict of interest disclosures. idaho and vermont are the other two, which is the mysterious. if you're running for office, you need to be able to disclose where you get your income, where your spouse gets their income,

it should be available online for people to see. michigan is one of the states where that's not available. perhaps because from time to time to reform that. it would be our hope that there would be performed following this kind of report. host: we have a democrat on the line from portland, oregon, denise. caller: i live in portland. portland has a lot of federal and state programs for people of low-income. there are a lot of homeless people and a lot of people with mental problems and addiction problems. i would like to know if that makes the points go up or down and i would also like to know if --where we are on the list. guest: i have oregon at no. 14. they get a 73%. they are the 14 states as a c. there are few b's and c's.

more than half the state is below with d's and f's. my computer is malfunctioning. host: i want to talk about a little of the pushback that you all have seen on this survey that you have put out. this is from bloomberg.com. it seems that some of the anger over the survey stems from new jersey actually ranking first. both of the editorials out there i have seen pushing back against this have mentioned this. guest: yes, there's a sense of new jersey ha-ha-ha. again, we are not measuring the corruption in the past, what we are measuring our the risks of corruption based on the current laws on the books. new jersey has been in a series of really good loss. in many cases they are better than the laws in other states.

to install ethics is a matter of regulation in a way. it is a matter of laws. that is how it operates. if people don't like regulation, they are against regulation, and they would not be happy with this project that basically says you need really good laws and regulations to have transparency and accountability. so there's some pushback on that and there was some pushback on the jersey. host: you mentioned the wall street journal article in. i want to read a section of that for you so that folks can hear what they had to say.

guest: it was interesting, this column, we had 330 different indicators that we went through. there was no questions involved in the details of the findings within those. there were trying to make a case. corruption is defined very clearly in the answer we wrote a letter to the editor and try to say, corruption is when you take money for private gain. i think that is a measure of corruption and that is what we are trying to say. we are trying to look at where states have had troubles of but mostly based on the laws that have on the books right now. new jersey is not a perfect state.

they have problems. we were pointing out that the laws in that state, after we did this whole study -- and we did not predict or say let's put new jersey at the top, we went through the whole process, we went through a peer review process and then publish the results of. these are the results. if you don't like regulation at all, and probably are not happy with the way some of the ethics of need to be regulated and that's what this report is saying it. host: joe asks on twitter -- guest: if you look at where citizens can look at information and weather information is transparent, you'll find there's more indictments, prosecutions and convictions to follow, because this information can be seen. at global integrity our colleagues have been doing this

work around the world more than 10 years as a corruption risk for the world. they are looking at countries and sometimes now looking within those same countries, which is what we are doing here. if you can see where laws changed, things can change. i will give you the example of louisiana. for 10 years we have been doing a states of disclosure, just looking interest disclosure law louisiana was at an f state. bobby kindle came in and said what would it take to get an a for public integrity? we look at washington state. louisiana passed this and lost the washington state has. what difference does it make? what i heard from people in louisiana, they still have problems, but disclosure laws are really amazing. different people are running for office. people who did not want to disclose anything on are

running. people who do not mind the disclosure are not running. they are help running the laws in the state. as i have an effect? i think it does. over the 10 years of that project, something like 24 state laws have been change based on getting a failing grade or bad grade. host: the states seem to be learning from each other as well. let's go to sharon on the republican line from illinois. good morning. caller: good morning, and think you for taking my call. i heard about this report and illinois got a passing grade, which was really hard to digest. it is really based on the walls of the past.

it is hard to me that just illinois' top passing one day after day governors go to prison. i read union bosses are getting double pensions because they found a loophole in the law that allows them to collect a second pension. it is really hard, and my last point is i have lived here for 15 years, and the whole time i have lived here the state government has been run by michael madigan. i read articles in the paper, but he is still running the whole state, so it does not matter who is elected in and out, as long as he is in there, he is the big boss. guest: use a passing grade.

illinois gets a seat overall. c overall. it is because the corruption. they have passed a number of good laws. they need to be enforced, the question about it. i think they do have problems. that is the reason for the state. illinois clearly has problems. yes, the history there is really quite amazing that we have seen, but we are not judging the history of the state, we are judging the laws on the books. host: a question from twitter, -- guest: we tried to do what is the gap? some states do have an ethics commission in place. we look at today enforce anything? do they have any independence?

they got a lower grade if they have that this commission in place but has no power and does not do anything. that barely registers as having it. we looked at the gatt trade practices and laws and tried to put that into effect in here. but twitter question is exactly right. -- the twitter question is exactly right. it has to be enforced. host: your report found that the lower have the to-system in place. guest: and delaware comes out as a c as well. c- actually. is this the perfect thing? no. we spent a year doing this. the details are there. if someone has a question about

any particular area of government, look at it. look at the integrity indicators. you can go through it in detail. caller: i think this is fantastic. wonderful. good job. what is the name of the website? guest: go to stateintegrity.org. you will find there you can take your state and come up with a map. you will have a whole list of the state's beneath the map. it is also available if you go to our site, public integrity. it will get you to the same place. host: we have colorado up with a d + rating.

colorado is there the bottom. 33 out of the but the state's. i see one, two, three, four f's in this state. this is meant to not condemn state legislators who do very good work all over the country, but it is there to do comparisons and really help lead a reform. i think five states have picked this up. let's go to st. louis, missouri. i wanted to congratulate you. i woke up and got really excited. everything has been going on in the news today. everything has been going on

with local government. i really think people did not understand the influence the state government has on their lives, rather than federal. so many reporters report on the federal government, that there is so much being put through with state governments. it is amazing. i want to commend you. they do so much. i will definitely be looking at your web sisite. host: do you have a sense of for government governmewhere the fl would compare to? guest: your point is a good one. the state level is very important. we are seeing less watchdog work at the state level.

that is the real reason for this. i would agree with you, there is more coverage of washington, i sometimes think not enough of thsome parts of it. at the state level it is really important. i am really pleased with the project, and i appreciate the comments. host: you said you are thinking about doing it for the federal government. how far away on that? guest: at least a year before we do that. there are various industries doing that. this is a project -- the biggest funders were the rita allen foundation. they did not get say over what we came up with. we are independent. the funding continues, we could continue the project. duncan on the republican

line from ohio. caller: i was wondering -- guest: i think he is looking at ohio. ohio is the 34 state in this study. it comes out at 66, a d. i am not sure what else the calller would like to know about that. host: tim on the independent line from virginia beach, virginia. caller: think you very much for your reporting efforts. the governor of virginia has made a contract with a foreign company and is forcing tolls on the hampton roads area to build bridges over the next 58 years with a guarantee of 13.5% interest profit. there was little or no

oversight. everyone and hampton roads is up in arms. there is little we are able to do to help turn this around. we are unhappy with the experiencit. host: article from "the new york times" -- -- is the 47 were state did risk of corruption. there does not one of nine states with no ethics commission. guest: that is correct. for va.ll whole nine f's virginia has some work to do, and i think what the calller is talking about is a specific area. we are not judging roads per

cent, but has to do with contrasting, procurement. caller: could you please elaborate on alabama ethics laws? guest: i will when i can find it. hang on just a moment. i do not have it memorized. host: alabama has a c- at 72%. as you are bringing of alabama, our notes and editorial from right after this report came out, praising this report. we talked about "the wall street journal" questioning this

report. overall happy they did this report. one question that comes up from "the new york times" -- do you think handing back some of these big federal programs back to the state is a good idea? guest: i am afraid i share the concern that if you say the states can handle these things, but have shown they have problems and the corruption risks -- half the states at a d or f, maybe it is not such a good idea. the election will decide those sorts of things. i have alabama here.

it comes out 15 out of the 50 states. as c-. for political financing. they get an a for internal auditing. better than many of the other states we have seen. host: joseph rights you give virginia an f on political financing when they have full disclosure laws. no limits on contributions, but you have to disclose everything in virginia. do you weigh one more than the other? guest: the no limits is a big issue, that you can pour in as much money as possible. does the disclosure catch up with the amount of money flowing? that is the other issue we would look at. sometimes the reporting as much later and not in the same detail.

the note when it is certainly one. disclosure is certainly one. host: norma and indiana. are you there? caller: my name is not normal. -- norma. i am wondering about disability -- guehost: we will get to that of the next segment. wanted to give you a chance to wrap up in terms of overall lessons learned in takeaways we should get from this report. i think this discussion has been great. the work is very serious. those who have looked at it recognize how detailed is and how it will last a long time.

we need more transparency and accountability in our view. thank you very much. host: up next, the discussion about federal disability payments. we will be right back. >> for this year's student cam competition restaurants to submit a video same what was the most important part of the constitution and why. we're speaking to an eighth grader in washington. your video was about to process and the digital age. can you explain what do process is? >> due process is the government treating you fairly in giving to be a price in court and legal circumstances. >> what effects has the digital

age had on due process? >> if today there is so much technology, and we are all carrying around phones that can give us locations. 25 years ago that did not exist. today we really have to figure out what can the government know about you through your information and what can't they? >> what does this stand for, and how does it relate to today's technology? >> the electronic communications privacy act. that was passed 26 years ago. 26 years ago we did not have as advanced technology as we do today. people could not imagine we were going to be storing everything and have some of information online. so now it is question of what should the government be able to access online? should they be able to know

anything you leave there, or more like a home where you need a lawrence -- warrant? guest: you interviewed two experts. how did they help you understand this? >> we talked to someone representing the government side of the argument, which your location is obvious to anyone who can see you, so we should be able to know about you and every word you are on line. >> before we did this i did not know much about what the government could know about the on line with facebook and all of that. after doing this, i have a greater understanding of what they do know, and everything is not just for me. i learned all about to process.

-- due process. i also work on a team to make this documentary come to life. we use technology all the time. we use it at school and on the go. i want others to realize the information they pose online is not only for them. the government can access it, so we need to think about what we put on line and make sure it is secure. >> thank you for joining us, and congratulations on your win. >> here is a portion of simon's video. >> it hot meal or google decides to give information, there is nothing we can do about it. now people are saying so much of my private life is in the hands of approval, i should be able to

insist the government gets a warrant. -- hands of google, i should be able to assist the government gets a warrant. >> a and just this past april, if they argued in court it should have to have access to e- mails insecure information about a search warrant. in 1986, there were about to deploy actual police resources in order to attract someone. >> you can watch this video in its entirety, as long as all other winning entries on its web site at studentcam.org. >> "washington journal" continues. host: every monday during the last hour, we have the your money segment where we look at a federal program and talk about

how your tax dollars are being spent. this week we're focusing on federal disability payments with statement, tdamon palmeta. how big is this expected to be of the coming fiscal year? guest: it has really grown. 130 billion were paid in 2011, almost double what it was paid 10 years ago. about 11 million americans who received social security disability payments. millions of americans depend on it. it accounts for richer of social security payments every year. we have seen the growth really skyrocket, especially as the recession took hold in this country. host: we're talking about 25 billion. guest: about 25 percent of all

social security payments. host: give us a brief history and how you qualify for it. guest: it was created in the 1950's. originally was greeted as a bridge american to are not able to work anymore to their retirement program. now people could get on social security disability for mental or physical illness. a lot of times people can be in their 20's or '30's. -- or 30's. essentially this comes out of the taxes you pay. so you have to qualify for social security disability. you go through this long process of applying at the state level, federal level, and you might have to appeal it and that sort of thing. host: how much money are we talking about? guest: people typically get $1,000 per month.

obviously not a lot of money, but one of the big benefits is to qualify for medicare after a certain amount of time. obviously people with health problems, medicare is one of the biggest benefits. typically you have to be over 65, but people can qualify if their on disabilities in the 30's and 40's. host: you say people pay into this. talk about the projections for the solvency of the program. guest: it probably has the shortest hfuse of any of these. it is predicted it will exhaust the funds by 2014. the retirement program has another 25 years. the medicare trust fund has another 15 years. the disability program only has four-five years. a lot of folks concerned about how they can make changes to a program that a lot of people depend on. host: we will get into some of

the changes being debated. we want to hear from you if you have questions for damian paletta. there have been specific hearings in recent weeks. guest: you can appeal to the federal level. there are 1500 administrative law judges that will decide whether or not you qualify for benefits. the data on the judge's is amazing. there is a real diversity. some are quite lenient and

approve almost every case. some of the judges are very tough. there's been a lot of complaints that it is uneven and unfair. major like decisions can be influenced based on which judge you are assigned for the case. that is one of the things congress is looking at. host: this is a chart from one of your stories you did last year. it notes of the administrative law judges, 1344 of the judges award more than denied. 439 have more denials that awards. tell us about the specific case that you did this story on from the judge in west virginia? guest: there is a lot of information about the judge's statistics. we looked at a judge who appeared to be an outsider, approving benefits in 99.7% of

the cases he heard over several years. we went down to west virginia were the judge is located and tried to talk to all sorts of people involved with the program to see why it was that this judge was approving virtually every case to be heard, and i actually talked to the judge. i talked to him at home. he explained that this part of the country were the town is is very impoverished and very hard to get a job. essentially if they only have a second grade education, it will be much harder for them to find a job, and that is why he approved so many benefits. host: he decided 1284 cases and awarded benefits in all but four for 2010 for the first six months of 2011. he approve payments and everyone of his 729 decisions.

this causes our rage on capitol hill. -- this caused outrage on capitol hill. guest: in this case, the inspector general was in his office the morning the story ran. he was placed on leave and has since retired. there are lots of other judges are proving benefits and over 90% of the cases. they are under a lot more scrutiny as well, because congress is asking all of these questions. these judges are protected by federal laws that prevent the social security administration from directing them to hear cases one way or another. the judges are protected by a lot of independence, but at the same time they're under a lot of pressure to move cases quickly because there are so many people applying for social security so the social security administration is facing the conundrum over how to keep cases

flowing through the pipeline and preventing judges from approving the case is without going over the data? host: republican line from st. louis, missouri. caller: the system seems to be flawed. i have seen people that seem quite normal better on disability, and i have seen people with crutches who cannot get around, cannot drive and very poor health and gets denied for years. it seems like there's something wrong with the system. guest: i hear that a lot from people. one thing people need to keep in mind is a third of the people on the people on disability are on for mental health reasons. it is very hard to tell. on the other hand, this calller

brings up something in which there is a lot of complaints. when you have that millions of people applying for health reasons, and it is invariably very subjective about how severe pain is or problematic mental health can be. host: once one of the judges approve you to be on mental health disability, is there any way to be kicked off? guest: it happens very rarely. they essentially sent you a letter a couple months later to ask you if your health has improved. if you start working and paying taxes, but they will know that as well. that is a way to get removed as well. there are times they will come back and reaudit folks that are on disability, but quite frankly budget constraints have made it so there is 1 million or more

waiting to have their cases revisited. host: friend on the line from pennsylvania. you were on with damian paletta. -- brenda. caller: hi. i am currently of disability beneficiary. what they do is -- i am almost starving to death and my home care yet i had to wait 14 months before my case was finally heard. during that time, i lost everything. it is not like people can sign up and get this "free money." you are in a lot of pain. you have medical that spirited you have to try to keep your car going come and you have no money to do so. you are not able to work. you cannot work.

it is very hard for the gentleman who's news people in the store walking around looking like they can do any job. that might just be a good day for them, and the rest of the month they are in the bed. guest: a lot of people who apply for disability are not able to work. they have very little resources as far as savings, and the process can take up to two years. these are people that cannot work and have major health problems. i have heard of many people losing their homes, marriages fall apart, and many people have to go on food stamps. it could be a grueling process to wait for the decisions to be made. host: has the social security department provided information on claims in 2012. 861,000 claims that will be considered in 2012. reconsideration. explain that. guest: that is when your case is

initially denied it, and you can reapply and have the state take another look at it. 746,000 of those hearings that we talked about. the average claim processing time is about 110 days. that is from the social security administration. talk about the claim processing time. that has been an area where there has been a big congressional push as well. guest: that is right. lawmakers get complaints from constituents that the process is taking so long, having to wait months and months for a decision and very little food or financial resources. congress has been pushing them to move the cases more quickly. the social security administration has been doing everything they can come up but a lot of judges feel they are under pressure to pump them through the system and not have time to scrutinize whether or not someone qualifies for the benefits. host: on twitter --

guest: that is a great question. the process takes a long time, because you are dealing with health issues that are very complicated. when someone brings 500 pages of medical records, that has to be sorted through and looked at. a lot of times these people might not have cars or phones and it's hard to track them down. a lot of lawyers involved to help applicants navigate through, but it can take a long time, especially if you are denied at several levels. host: again, we are talking to damian paletta of "the wall street journal" who recently won a scripps howard foundation award, first place in washington reporting, on this series you did on the disability system.

this is the release from the scripps howard announcing the reward -- a war. he is reportiis reporting prompd resignations of long-term efforts to overhaul the system that we're talking about now. we will go back to the phones. maryland is on the independent line from new york, new york. caller: good morning. i can understand the previously did that called. i can understand there are places in the subsidies for people like that, and i do feel bad when people do misjudge for them. however, and our neighborhood, which is not that big, we live in upstate new york, there are about poor people on the street -- four people on the street. one guy worked for the

corrections department. he left for a disability. i do not know what the reason was. he has been working on his property landscaping. they have a gorgeous pool, a huge garage, a beautiful home. i am happy they have that, but this guy is on disability. he can do all of these things. every day you see him out working. another one sells her stuff. another one was on disability and probably needed it. she is back to work part-time, and that is wonderful. in doing this story come i heard many stories like this. for every story like that i heard, i would hear a story of someone who's said -- for example, a case of someone who

ur cancer, andcancer and agar ended up dying in the hospital. the social security administration is doing a lot of work to try to alleviate that and make the process as consistent as possible. when you are dealing with several million people applying for benefits every year and thousands of folks who are tasked with making the decisions all over the country, it is hard to get the consistency. host: how big of a problem is it with people dying in the system while they're waiting for this? guest: it probably happens a couple of times a year. we have heard stories about people passing away after they have waited one year or more. this was a system that was

billed for terminally-ill people. who knows if the disability payments would have helped these people. the idea is they could have lived in a little more dignity or been in a different situation and not have to draw on the resources of family members. it is a hard issue to deal with, but it does happen. host: palm city, fla., on the republican line. caller: my name is michelle. i am calling from palm city, florida. i am only 43-years-old. i went to a hospital about an hour away from here. i was there all night in the pain i was going through. they diagnosed me as a diabetic.

i see people of using this system. it should not be happening. they are bipolar in turning around and leaving kids that are not even theirs. that is where it should be looked at more, where those people should not be on it. they own five cars here in our apartment. her boyfriend just tried to run over me, and there is nothing i can do. i have worked all of my life. guest: michelle raises an interesting point. obviously a lot of people have health problems, either physical or mental, and they could do some work but not able to work 40 hours per week. the sources security

administration makes the decision based on gainful activity. can they work enough's to provide living by themselves? it sounds like someone has to be completely incapacitated. you can still be able to grow to the grocery store. -- you may still be able to go to the grocery store. host: a question from jean on e- mail -- guest: this is part of the sources security disability program. it is called something different. it is not funded by the social security disability trust fund that general treasury revenue.

they have to essentially reapplied when they're 18 or the case reheard when they're 18. they could be allowed to stay on the benefits or removed from the program via. i am not sure what the average is of folks who go into the system when they're 18, but that is the normal process. and host: don writes -- do a lot of these folks bring lawyers? guest: about 90% bring lawyers. so almost all of them do it on a contingency basis, were they do not get paid unless the client wins the case. they get paid directly from the sources security administration a deduction of what the benefits is the person would receive. you do not need money to get a lawyer to have your case heard. host: the government will pay

for your lawyer through the money would have gotten? get three will years of back pay, and the lawyer will get a percentage of the back pay paid directly to the lawyer from the social security administration. host: how much money goes to lawyer fees? guest: $1.5 billion per year. it has turned into a huge business. of time people wait for a hearing has risen. it has turned into a huge business. i am sure people see lots of billboards. advertisements on television. in many cases you did not to be a lawyer to represent someone in these cases. there is a big business growing that has caused concern. quite frankly, they need all the help they can get to move the

cases through. in a lot of cases the lawyers will help the applicant prepare the paperwork and have a case ready to go so it does that delayed the case anymore. host: we're talking about statistics for the social security disability program. in 2013 the social security administration is expected to pay out wonder $43 billion in benefits to approximately 11 million disabled workers and their families. let's go to chicago, indiana. arlene on the democratic line. caller: listening to one of the ladies talking about people did not seem to be disabled enough to be on so security. i am on ssi because i have to disabilities. -- two disabilities. i am epileptic.

people misjudge people about what they say. 0-- they see. i try to cover up the back pain that i have and the pain that goes down my leg from my back, because i do not want people to know i have these disabilities, so i tried to cover it up. and people need to quit judging people about what they see. i have six or seven seizures a month. how do they know i had these? i have been on disability since i was 20. go to susan o from pennsylvania. caller: i have a family member

on disability. he has severe mental illness. he is 49-years-old. he has spent half his life in an institution. the institution sent him home to 88-year-old mother one day. my sister was the payee. i went to great pains to get my sister as the peak so my brother could not make decisions for himself. -- asth the payee. he only needed a short love note to social security to have my sister removed. he gets the money. yesterday for easter i was over there making food for my mother and brother, and he was accusing me of taking some visa card. he lost the card to even get the money now. i think if you're going to do

anything, if you're going to help people, we need to have the same standard to get the payee removed as maybe we did to get them on, to show he has severe mental illness and can handle the money himself. guest: what the calller is talking about in a lot of situations where the person is unable to handle the monthly payments, people can be assigned as payees. it will be a guardian or a person in charge of distributing the money in a responsible way. there are cases we here where the payees of use the money or the people that should be getting the money and it turns into a big scam, so the social security administration is concerned about that. and hoshost: maria writes -- guest: bacon called the social

security of ministration inspector general office. i think they have a number on the website to report a scam. just because you see someone lifting a trash bag, does not mean they are lying about their disability. these things are very complicated. that is why the process has become so burdensome. host: how many cases does the inspector general? guest: i imagine they would get thousands of coal per year. host: wrong on the republican line. -- ron. caller: my dad had half a dozen strokes and lost the ability to work, what, everything. i applied for so security disability and took a little over four years. they recommend he be cut off.

then we go for three-six months until i got that restored. what i ended up having to do relative to the pay and everything, i got guardianship of him and fought. i spent tens of thousands of dollars in time and lawyers and everything else to get the claim done. it took almost four years. they did come down to the guardianship office and audit me every year in check for the money was going. it was extremely difficult to get. the contractor, i do not even know how they said he could work construction. he was actually a vegetable. i know one person getting so security disability that can work, so i see both sides of the coin. at the end of the day, it was

extremely difficult to get this doses security disability for him and maintain it. thank you. guest: people that apply for the benefits, a lot of times it is the family members that have to fight for the bureaucracy. whether it is for a parent, child, it can really be grueling and time consuming. it can cost thousands of dollars a lost work just to try to get to the system and stay in the system. it is not just affecting the people who might need the benefits, but their loved ones as well. host: we are talking with damian paletta, financial reporter for "the wall street journal." the disability program is more risk than the overall social security program. here is an article from february 15 in which to me the guy there

said the white house and republican lawmakers discuss shoring up social security. how far along have the conversations moved? guest: it is my understanding that once those discussions fell apart as far as the big deal went, they had not really revisited it. i do not expect there to be much conversation at all until after the november elections, but quite possibly not until after 2013-2014. so the social security administration is paying out more in benefits each year that it brings them through tax revenue. they could redirect some of the money that goes to the broader social security retirement fund, which is what a lot of folks have done in the past, or they could limit benefits or raise taxes to bring in more money. several different options. none of them are particularly easy in an environment where fiscal issues are hotly debated

on capitol hill. it is true there is a short you. -- view. host: talk about the uptick better plan for salsas security benefits as unemployment runs out? guest: that is something interesting we found bashkir. when you are on unemployment, you are looking for another job presumably. people on social security disability cannot work because they have health issues. what we saw is there have been studies that show an uptick in the amount of people applying for disability rights as unemployment benefits were expiring. we talked to a lot of people about that. a lot of folks said they had health problems but wanted to stay in the work force. host: this became the knicks lifeline?

guest: that is right. host: this is talking about the uptick verses the amount of people but have the weeks running out. it picks up to 10%. back to the phones. and on the democratic line from california. good morning. caller: good morning. what i hate about the way social security disability people do to people that are disabled, is when the social security doctors and medical reports that the doctor sent into seoul's security where they think a person can still work, when they are actually disabled and have lost the use of their legs and think they can look at them and see them is ridiculous.

it is ridiculous they tried to force these people to go through all of these problems and have to fight for something they have been paying into for 30 or 40 years, and they can take a person on drugs, these younker people that hardly even work during their lifetime, and they will give them a checked. they take it almost as much as the person that worked 30 or 40 years paying into the system. that is ridiculous. it is terrible the way the claims examiner looks at these cases. that is why it is so backlogged on the appeals, because it is allowing some of the claims when they actually -- you can see it.

you can see the person is not able to come and also the doctor's report to back them up. howst: you could imagine copp hard it is for the person on appeals. they could have report saying they should never work again, and then you could have another report saying they are ok to work full-time. it is very difficult to do their job. host: we have seen judges that approved a higher rate. here it is broken down by individual states with the highest approval rates for those that are applying for social security disability insurance. and the dark green our social security applications that are

approved at a 50% rate or more. north dakota and south dakota, nebraska, wyoming, south dakota, north dakota, new hampshire, vermont, alaska, hawaii, and puerto rico. is this because of where they happen to live, or some states you are more likely to get on? guest: in some cases your more likely to get on. some people if they get divided one case, they move back to another state where they're more likely to get benefits. the social security administration is trying to crack down on a judge shopping where people might try to apply in places where there are more likely to get benefits. they're trying to make the process as consistent as possible, but at the same time moving cases as quickly as possible. host: what the west virginia

judge we talked about earlier, the people tried to get in his jurisdiction? guest: it sounds like there is federal investigations going on to find out what was going on there. we know there were some lawyers who benefited greatly by the number of cases that this judge was approving. i think that is one of the things investigators are looking at. host: were there other investigations that york reports coffin? guest: two criminal investigations. several people that have left office or moved down into non- management positions in office since the story ran. host: james on the independent line from north carolina. caller: yes, sir. this call is not for me. it is for a hero in principle,

north carolina. this person, like i said, she is a hero. she had a trucking business there. she gave work to a lot of people, and she has done more for that town and the environment and is really publicized. now she need some help, and they took some property of hers. they seized land because of property-tax dispute. now she is trying to get some ssi or social security now, and she cannot do it because the property is still in her name, even though the town and took it basically. -- the town took it basically.

i wanted some online resources to help this person. as far as social security goes, i think they could get more revenue by eliminating department of motor vehicles, patriot act of a national state registry, homeland security -- all of this garbage, and pump some money into along with education in schools. i will stay on point. guest: i think what james might have been talking about, social security disability, the program you pay for out of your pay check each month, i do not believe -- if you are disabled in qualified for the benefits of you would get the benefits. supplemental security income, i believe there is some sort of test or if you have a lot of financial resources, you may not

qualify because you are not qualified as poor and needy. that could be a situation for some people. it sounds like a complicated legal issue with lawyers might be best able to navigate such a problem. host: we talk about judge shopping. are there allegations into doctor shopping? guest: i do not know if there are allegations, but i have heard stories about people going to doctors. i did a story last march about a situation in puerto rico and why so many people were having their benefits approved. i do know the security administration inspector general is looking into dr. shopping in puerto rico. that is something that is a potential area of vulnerability into the program. host: kathleen on the republican line in indiana. caller: good morning.

i worked for 35 years, and my spine that started to disintegrate. i worked heavy jobs to make money, and i made around $350 per week. my disability does not even come to $800 per month. i wondered if i could apply for ssi or what? i figure everything goes by what you earned through your life. can i apply for ssi, because it is less than $200 per week? guest: i believe you can. i think quite frankly many people to benefit from both programs. i would say to contact the social security administration or contact a legal expert. she is the only not alone.

host: what is your next story in this series? guest: we are waiting to see where the investigations go and where congress decides to weigh on this right now. one of the things interesting is there are doctors, lawyers, judges come of millions of americans in different areas of people impacted by this. there is no shortage of stories. host: damian paletta of "the wall street journal." thank you for joining us today. as we leave you, we want to send you to all live picture of the white house south lawn for the annual easter egg roll is taking place today. ♪ ♪